Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Strategies & Market Trends : A.I.M Users Group Bulletin Board -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: LemonHead who wrote (10279)	2/14/2000 6:02:00 PM
From: OldAIMGuy	Respond to of 18929

Hi Keith, Last things first! Yes, I always adjust the opposite trade GTC order as soon as one fills. If I sell, I adjust the Buy and visa versa. Mr. L was alive as of Nov. 1998, I believe. I have an address for him if anyone would like it. Please request via Private Message or email. The value of my Equities, EXCLUDING Cash, has risen 8.7% since the first of the year. The total portfolio including cash has risen 18%. This means I've been selling all along and funneling those $$$ into the Cash Reserve - which is why it's up so much for the YTD. AIM has capped my risk at about 8.7% above what it was at on January 1st. All the rest of the value is flowing over to safety in my money market funds. Best regards, Tom

To: LemonHead who wrote (10279)	2/14/2000 11:39:00 PM
From: Steve Grabczyk	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 18929

Keith: I always adjust the opposing GTC order. It is part of the process. It was tough to figure out why until I put pencil to paper (the original Lichello method). It all has to do with the Portfolio Control, # of shares and the value that those shares have to be to get past your $ resistance plus $ trade amount. Even though your PC doesn't change when you get a sell, the number of shares does. Since the calcs are all based on port. value the number of shares is important. I hope this explanation doesn't confuse the issue. Tom is much better at explaining this than I. Regards, Steve